W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-policy@w3.org > May 2007

Utility of Ignorable?

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 16:01:59 -0700
Message-ID: <E16EB59B8AEDF445B644617E3C1B3C9C03AEBCED@repbex01.amer.bea.com>
To: <public-ws-policy@w3.org>

Hi all,

As I did the update to the primer for 4414, it became glaringly obvious
that I couldn't see the utility of Ignorable when Optional is available.
The EOL assertion is a great example of this.  The table in 3.8.4 shows
the boolean combinations.

When Optional="true", ignorable means nothing to the client.  When
Optional="false", then Ignorable has some impact.  But we see the *only*
difference between Ignorable=true and ignorable=false is when the client
does not know about the assertion and lax processing is done.  

We have effectively addeed Ignorable for the sole scenario of where
optional=false and we want lax intersection clients to produce an
intersection.  But this doesn't seem like a tremendously useful scenario
to me.  I would think that a service would just want optional=true and
be done with it!  Or, if it is really required, then why would it want
lax clients to produce an intersection?  It could just put
optional=false and be done with it.

Your thoughts?  I don't want to raise this as a bug quite yet because
perhaps a quick bit of explanation will do it.  

Received on Thursday, 3 May 2007 23:01:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:38:34 UTC